complaint·April 11, 2025

Regarding allegation that facility mismanaged a resident's medication, LPA reviewed medication administration records for all residents and conducted inventories of medications. LPA observed the medication administration records to be complete and documented. LPA did not observe any errors with medications. LPA reviewed staff files and observed all required training in place to meet regulations for the staff members present at the facility. LPA attempted to contact former staff member but was unable to conduct an interview with the former staff member. LPA was unable to corroborate the allegation. Regarding allegation that resident information was not kept confidential, LPA observed in the facility that all client records are locked an inaccessible to clients in care. S1 and S2 denied any knowledge of listing in on a meeting with placement agency and facility. LPA attempted to interview former staff member but was unable to conduct an interview with the former staff member. LPA was unable to corroborate the allegation. Regarding allegation that the facility was not meeting residents needs, LPA conducted interviews with six residents and all but the alleged victim denied the allegation. The alleged victim had minimal needs and services identified as R1 was independent with all ADLs, and continued to be active and drive in the community. LPA was unable to identify any unmet needs of residents in care as documented in the resident's appraisals and needs and services plan. LPA was unable to corroborate the allegation. Regarding the allegations the facility was not kept clean and was not kept free of rodents. LPA conducted an annual inspection just prior to receiving the complaint and did not observe any evidence of rodents and observed the facility to meet the cleanliness standards established by the department. LPA also obtained records from the facility documenting the existing pest control that is utilized by the facility on an ongoing basis. LPA was presented with pictures of rodent droppings but was unable to confirm the location of the images as they were very close up and provided no indication they were actually from the facility. additionally, LPA was presented with a photo of a mouse captured in a trap which does indicate the facility was addressing the presence of rodents in and around the facility in a timely manner. Regarding the allegation that alleged victim was working as maintenance staff LPA was unable to corroborate the allegation. Reporting party indicated R1 was paid $100 a month to perform these services which was denied by R1 and S1. R1 did indicate he wanted to help out around the facility and had a background in handiwork. Licensee denied requesting or demanding that R1 perform theses duties and denied any staff member would request R1 to perform such tasks. Report Continued on LIC 9099-C The department does encourage activities for residents that may include such activities like gardening and outings. LPA observed R1 was independent with transportation and driving and there are no regulations that would prevent a resident on going on outings or purchase own food in addition to what is being supplied by the facility. Finally, LPA reviewed staff records and observed all documented training for staff members present and met department regulations. LPA was unable to corroborate the allegation that staff were not adequately trained to meet resident needs. Although the allegation may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred. The Department has determined that the allegations of (indicate the complaint allegation) are unsubstantiated but if any additional information is received this complaint can be amended and the finding can be changed. There are no deficiencies is cited per California Code of Regulations, TITLE 22. Exit interview was conducted with facility staff. Appeal Rights were issued, and a copy of this report was left at the facility. The following deficiency is cited per California Code of Regulations, TITLE 22. Exit interview was conducted with facility staff. Appeal Rights were issued, and a copy of this report was left at the home.